Ellis Speagle Reflection for 10\/06<\/p>\n
Germany deported 81 Afghan men in July who all had criminal convictions and, according to the German government, were legally required to leave. I actually had a hard time seeing the controversy at first. If someone commits a serious crime and has no legal right to stay in Germany, deporting them seems pretty reasonable except Germany sent them abroad. Even though Germany doesn’t recognize Taliban as Afghanistans “legitimate” government, it also factors in torture and executions and other abuses happening there but Germany needed the Taliban to accept these men back, and as a result, Qatar ended up acting as the intermediary for this problem. I still don\u2019t think that means Germany should be forced to keep every Afghan who commits a serious crime but THAT answer feels too easy too. For my previous paper, I wrote about this example how someone is not convicted of rape or murder and the victim exhausted their legal options in Germany so what exactly is Germany supposed to do with that person? I can understand why German voters would be frustrated by an immigration system where deportation exists on paper but becomes almost impossible in reality, but then again, thats how it is for most governmental policies in my experience. There are Afghans who were told they could come to Germany and have instead been stuck waiting as the government processes these dilemas so some of the people were offered protection because their work or circumstances put them at risk after the Taliban takeover. Friedrich Merz did not hide that he wanted a tougher migration policy, still as immigration has become a huge political issue in Germany. Mainstream parties are trying to respond to voters who think migration has gone too far, and I can understand why Merz would not want the AfD to go after the issue but the Afghans who already received promises of immigration existed before that political calculation changed. The two articles also was interesting since both used the word \u201cAfghans\u201d as if it describes one immigration problem. The 81 men on the deportation flight and an Afghan waiting for Germany to honor their promise have to deal with the breakdown in buacracry.\u00a0 I don\u2019t really have a problem with Germany deciding that its immigration system needs limits and I also don\u2019t think humanitarian protection means Germany loses the ability to deport anyone from Afghanistan forever. Perhaps “legally” it isn\u2019t that simple. but politically it definitely isn\u2019t. If a promise of protection only lasts until migration becomes unpopular, I\u2019m not sure what that promise was worth in the first place. Its the same as “rights.” If a country can take them away at their convience then its not a right, its a privledge. This is what bothers me specifically about how governments can decide who gets what rights and who doesn’t. How are migrants expected to enter a country legally when the barriers of immigration are so complex that it makes it virtually impossble to do so within the bounds of the law.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Ellis Speagle Reflection for 10\/06 Germany deported 81 Afghan men in July who all had criminal convictions and, according to the German government, were legally required to leave. I actually had a hard time seeing the controversy at first. If someone commits a serious crime and has no legal right to stay in Germany, deporting<\/p>\n